hp’s search for green replacements for restricted ... footprint = wrong tool for alternatives...

© 2010 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.The information contained herein is subject to change without notice

Helen HolderCorporate Material Selection Manager7 July 2010

HP’s Search for Green Replacements for Restricted Substances in Electronics

Topics

• RoHS and Substance Restrictions• Evaluating Replacement Materials• Pilot Program•Driving Green Chemistry in the Future

2 6-Jul-10© 2010 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.The information contained herein is subject to change without notice

History

•HP history of environmental materials work• Example: Pb-free solder research in early 1990s


RoHS: The Law That Changed Everything

EU Directive 2002/95/EC on the

Restriction of the Use of certain Hazardous

Substances in Electrical and Electronic

Equipment


Logo from companion regulation Waste Electrical and Electronic

Equipment (WEEE) Directive

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/WEEE_2.svg�

Companies Implement RoHS Restrictions

•Material selection:−Cost−Function−Reliability −Manufacturability

•All unregulated substitutes equally acceptable


1 July 2006

More Regulations Coming

• Substance restrictions a major class of regulation for finished electronic products−More substances−More jurisdictions−More reporting


Choosing Better Materials

• Replacing materials is expensive−Select alternatives that won’t

be restricted −White lists

•Want to avoid unintended consequences−MTBE


What’s “Green”?

•Many tools

•Lots of information


Carbon vs LCA vs Risk vs Hazard

•HP uses all of these tools for decision-making:−Carbon Footprint− Life Cycle Analysis−Risk Assessment−Comparative Hazard Assessment

•Good tools with specific uses


Carbon Footprint• Carbon footprint is the total greenhouse

gas emissions caused by a product• Measured in tons of carbon dioxide

equivalent (tCO2e)• Subset of Life Cycle Analysis (LCA)• Two ways to calculate for products

− “Use phase” = Energy use over the service life of a product (kWh/year for a product then convert to kgCO2e/kWh)• Dominant approach • Most standardized

− “Embedded” = Emissions over the whole life of a product or service, from the extraction of raw materials and manufacturing through use and end of life


Carbon Footprint = Wrong Tool for Alternatives Assessment

Use phase = no differentiation for chemicalsEmbedded = not standardized, not precise enoughNot acceptable to trade-off high chemical hazard

for carbon benefits

Carbon still critical: in 2007 HP joined the Carbon Disclosure Project Supply-Chain Leadership Collaboration to define standards to report energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from suppliers, and implement a pilot on our own suppliers.


Life Cycle Analysis (LCA)• Life cycle assessment is

comprehensive “cradle-to-grave” − From gathering raw materials from

the earth to when all materials are returned to the earth

− Good and important tool

• Resource and time intensive, especially to get all data

• Availability of data determines the accuracy of the final results

• Works well for simple alternatives assessments (PC/ABS vs Mg chassis)


LCA = Limited Usefulness for Many Alternatives AssessmentsFor complex systems, existing tools and inventories

are not precise enough−Similar materials not well differentiated

• e.g. Beryllium copper vs phosphor bronze for connector contacts give identical results in LCA with SimaPro

−May improve over time

Not acceptable to trade-off high chemical hazard for other life cycle benefitsHundreds of compounds across thousands of

components in electronics products = very complex, impractical for many decisions


Risk vs Hazard

•Hazard is the inherent property of a substance to cause adverse effects when an organism is exposed

• Risk is the probability of an adverse effect in an organism caused by exposure to a substance under specified circumstances

Risk is a function of hazard and exposure


Risk Assessment• Evaluation of the risk to human

health and the environment by the actual or potential presence of pollutants

• Structured, well-defined, established

• Much more detailed than LCA• Considers:− Source of the chemical − Fate and transport mechanisms− Exposure scenarios −Dose and thresholds


Good Uses of Risk Assessment• Life cycle and risk assessment

needed for development and implementation of effective environmental regulations−Hazard assessment is necessary,

but not sufficient for regulatory decisions

−Volume, exposure potential, etc. are critical

•Very useful for formulators− Industrial EH&S more challenging

for raw chemicals than finished materials and products


17

Not Comparative [Example: Arsenic]• Inorganic Arsenic:

−Acute inhalation exposure of workers to high levels of arsenic dusts or fumes has resulted in gastrointestinal effects (nausea, diarrhea, abdominal pain), while acute exposure of workers to inorganic arsenic has also resulted in central and peripheral nervous system disorders. (1) −Acute oral exposure to inorganic arsenic, at doses of approximately 600 micrograms per kilogram body weight per day (µg/kg/d) or higher in humans, has resulted in death. Oral exposure to lower levels of inorganic arsenic has resulted in effects on the gastrointestinal tract (nausea, vomiting), central nervous system (CNS) (headaches, weakness, delirium), cardiovascular system (hypotension, shock), liver, kidney, and blood (anemia, leukopenia). (1,2) −Acute animal tests in rats and mice have shown inorganic arsenic to have moderate to high acute toxicity. (5)

•Arsine –Acute inhalation exposure to arsine by humans has resulted in death; it has been reported that a half-

hour exposure to 25 to 50 parts per million (ppm) can be lethal. (4) – The major effects from acute arsine exposure in humans include headaches, vomiting, abdominal pains,

hemolytic anemia, hemoglobinuria, and jaundice; these effects can lead to kidney failure. (4,8) –Arsine has been shown to have extreme acute toxicity from acute animal tests. (5)

Need for Comparative Tools

•Databases hold chemical information, including Risk Assessments

•Not organized in a way that chemists, formulators, or users need for alternatives assessment

• Several comparative tools developed


http://chemicalprofiler.wiki.zoho.com/�

Green Screen for Safer Chemicals• Comparative hazard tool• Developed by Clean Production Action• Environment and human health• Rates 17 hazard topics

(High, Medium, Low)• Decision logic looks at particular

combinations of scores for a final four-point benchmark score

• Uses the most conservative scoring guidelines of previous systems

19

More information available at http://www.cleanproduction.org


Underlying Idea of Shift to Hazard• Reducing risk through

hazard reduction is more effective and efficient than exposure reduction (Ling)

• Exposure reduction is not an option for most end users of materials (out of HP’s control)

• Exposure potentials are roughly equal for the same application in alternatives assessment

20 6-Jul-10

To read more about the EU shift from risk to hazard,

check out Mark Schapiro’s book Exposed


Comparative Hazard Works for Alternatives Assessment in the Same Application• Exposure is equal for the

same application• Hazard assessment becomes

an effective proxy for risk for the same application

• Hazard assessments are faster, easier to complete than LCA or Risk− Narrower, endpoints are

relatively well defined− Scientifically-based and

facilitates relatively quicker chemical assessments


Green Screen for Alternatives Assessment

•Green Screen is the primary tool HP will be using for alternatives assessment when replacing a restricted substance

• Enables identification of better materials, not just minimum acceptable

•Green Screen results are only part of decision−Still must meet performance and cost targets

•HP will continue to use Risk Assessment, LCA, and Carbon Footprint tools as appropriate


Green Screen Meets Business Goals

•Helps us to select alternatives that won’t be restricted in the future

•Helps us articulate materials goals to suppliers and chemical formulators


Pilot Program

• Small program to learn what works

• Engage directly with formulators−Skip complex parts of

supply chain


Formulators

HP

PVC-Free Green Screen Pilot

•Green Screen introduced to material approval process

•All PVC-free power cord material suppliers trained on the Green Screen−Suppliers complete assessments in

parallel with HP

•Additives: flame retardants, plasticizers, anti-oxidants, UV stabilizers


Driving Green Chemistry

•Culture at formulators starting to change

• “Maybe we should screen ingredients beforewe put them into a formulation.”


Search for Green Materials

• It is a search−Not as many options as we

need right now

•Using existing business processes for material selection−Articulating requirements and

driving through procurement−Chemists and material

scientists are working with the new requirements to develop green materials


The Future•Bring Green Screen

requirements to other types of materials

•Change chemical company culture

• Promote Green Screen in electronics industry

• Third party repository for results

• Integrate hazard better into LCA


QUESTIONS

hp’s search for green replacements for restricted ... footprint = wrong tool for alternatives...

Documents